Law Commons^™

On The Efficient Deployment Of Rules And Standards To Define Federal Jurisdiction, Jonathan R. Nash

Vanderbilt Law Review

Congress and the federal courts have traditionally adopted rules, as opposed to standards, to establish the boundaries of federal district court jurisdiction. More recently, the Supreme Court has strayed from this path in two areas: federal question jurisdiction and admiralty jurisdiction. Commentators have generally supported the use of discretion in determining federal question jurisdiction, but they have not recognized the relationship to the rule-standard distinction, nor more importantly have they considered the importance of where discretion enters the jurisdictional calculus. This Article argues that predictability and efficiency make it normatively desirable to have rules predominate jurisdictional boundaries and thus to …

Federal Right Jurisdiction And The Declaratory Remedy, Herman L. Trautman

Vanderbilt Law Review

Why should we have federal district courts? What should be their primary function? These questions are fundamental to the formulation of a rational basis for the distribution of judicial power between state courts and the trial courts of the federal government.

Our American federal system seeks as a constant objective an appropriate division of governmental power between a national unit, which deals with problems requiring uniform treatment, and state units, which have responsibility for problems depending more upon local conditions. Applying the principle to the federal district courts, it seems clear that their primary function should be to adjudicate federal …

A Symposium On Federal Jurisdiction And Procedure: Forward, Joseph C. Hutcheson Jr.

Vanderbilt Law Review

"A law suit has always been an adversary proceeding and it probably always will be..." "The trial being considered, therefore, as an adversary proceeding, the necessity for the adoption of rules for its conduct which will keep the fight out in the open, give the opponents equal opportunity, and prevent judicial ambuscade, is imperative.'